quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

I haven't forgotten and you may remember the two of us had serious conversations about this stockpile months ago.

Here again Vlads reputation seems to be outside the facts. Vlad is reputed to be powerful, menacing and a global threat, yet he's running into bullet supply problems with DPRK.

I'm a bit skeptical that Vlad holds any sway over the GOP and the above is a good reason why. What is there really for any side to look to to Vlad? America can simply murder its enemies like Bin Laden, Vlad cannot. America can sail a Navy and conquer another sovereign nation, Vlad cannot. Do Vlads missiles actually fly and arrive on time and on target? I know mine do. My Ford pickups come from the factory with extended warrantys, Vlad can't build a car. The list goes on, I know I don't need to.

Russia has an economy the size of Texas right? I believe I have very correctly said from the early stages of the Ukraine war our diplomats should be bending Russian diplomats ears with a steady stream of offers to assist in securing and safekeeping Russias nuke arsenal. If that arsenal is neutralized, that's it, the end. The Great Bear Boogie man we can guess will always live in in the minds of the quavering sissy boys, but it's been demonstrated over and over Vlad ain't capable of anything else.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

I haven't forgotten and you may remember the two of us had serious conversations about this stockpile months ago.

Here again Vlads reputation seems to be outside the facts. Vlad is reputed to be powerful, menacing and a global threat, yet he's running into bullet supply problems with DPRK.

I'm a bit skeptical that Vlad holds any sway over the GOP and the above is a good reason why. What is there really for any side to look to to Vlad? America can simply murder its enemies like Bin Laden, Vlad cannot. America can sail a Navy and conquer another sovereign nation, Vlad cannot. Do Vlads missiles actually fly and arrive on time and on target? I know mine do. My Ford pickups come from the factory with extended warrantys, Vlad can't build a car. The list goes on, I know I don't need to.

Russia has an economy the size of Texas right? I believe I have very correctly said from the early stages of the Ukraine war our diplomats should be bending Russian diplomats ears with a steady stream of offers to assist in securing and safekeeping Russias nuke arsenal. If that arsenal is neutralized, that's it, the end. The Great Bear Boogie man we can guess will always live in in the minds of the quavering sissy boys, but it's been demonstrated over and over Vlad ain't capable of anything else.

He has great sway over Republicans because they are phony hypocrites and he has the proof.

Personally I doubt his strategic weapons are any more reliable than his tactical forces turned out to be, the Strategic Rocket Forces have always been one of the most corrupt branches of the Soviet/Russian forces, so I would expect missiles that won't fly and warheads that won't go bang, where-ever they land.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

I haven't forgotten and you may remember the two of us had serious conversations about this stockpile months ago.

Here again Vlads reputation seems to be outside the facts. Vlad is reputed to be powerful, menacing and a global threat, yet he's running into bullet supply problems with DPRK.

I'm a bit skeptical that Vlad holds any sway over the GOP and the above is a good reason why. What is there really for any side to look to to Vlad? America can simply murder its enemies like Bin Laden, Vlad cannot. America can sail a Navy and conquer another sovereign nation, Vlad cannot. Do Vlads missiles actually fly and arrive on time and on target? I know mine do. My Ford pickups come from the factory with extended warrantys, Vlad can't build a car. The list goes on, I know I don't need to.

Russia has an economy the size of Texas right? I believe I have very correctly said from the early stages of the Ukraine war our diplomats should be bending Russian diplomats ears with a steady stream of offers to assist in securing and safekeeping Russias nuke arsenal. If that arsenal is neutralized, that's it, the end. The Great Bear Boogie man we can guess will always live in in the minds of the quavering sissy boys, but it's been demonstrated over and over Vlad ain't capable of anything else.

He has great sway over Republicans because they are phony hypocrites and he has the proof.

Personally I doubt his strategic weapons are any more reliable than his tactical forces turned out to be, the Strategic Rocket Forces have always been one of the most corrupt branches of the Soviet/Russian forces, so I would expect missiles that won't fly and warheads that won't go bang, where-ever they land.

You are, and will remain a moron.....


.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

I haven't forgotten and you may remember the two of us had serious conversations about this stockpile months ago.

Here again Vlads reputation seems to be outside the facts. Vlad is reputed to be powerful, menacing and a global threat, yet he's running into bullet supply problems with DPRK.

I'm a bit skeptical that Vlad holds any sway over the GOP and the above is a good reason why. What is there really for any side to look to to Vlad? America can simply murder its enemies like Bin Laden, Vlad cannot. America can sail a Navy and conquer another sovereign nation, Vlad cannot. Do Vlads missiles actually fly and arrive on time and on target? I know mine do. My Ford pickups come from the factory with extended warrantys, Vlad can't build a car. The list goes on, I know I don't need to.

Russia has an economy the size of Texas right? I believe I have very correctly said from the early stages of the Ukraine war our diplomats should be bending Russian diplomats ears with a steady stream of offers to assist in securing and safekeeping Russias nuke arsenal. If that arsenal is neutralized, that's it, the end. The Great Bear Boogie man we can guess will always live in in the minds of the quavering sissy boys, but it's been demonstrated over and over Vlad ain't capable of anything else.

He has great sway over Republicans because they are phony hypocrites and he has the proof.

Personally I doubt his strategic weapons are any more reliable than his tactical forces turned out to be, the Strategic Rocket Forces have always been one of the most corrupt branches of the Soviet/Russian forces, so I would expect missiles that won't fly and warheads that won't go bang, where-ever they land.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Putin has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

Remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s%20in%20the%20world.

I haven't forgotten and you may remember the two of us had serious conversations about this stockpile months ago.

Here again Vlads reputation seems to be outside the facts. Vlad is reputed to be powerful, menacing and a global threat, yet he's running into bullet supply problems with DPRK.

I'm a bit skeptical that Vlad holds any sway over the GOP and the above is a good reason why. What is there really for any side to look to to Vlad? America can simply murder its enemies like Bin Laden, Vlad cannot. America can sail a Navy and conquer another sovereign nation, Vlad cannot. Do Vlads missiles actually fly and arrive on time and on target? I know mine do. My Ford pickups come from the factory with extended warrantys, Vlad can't build a car. The list goes on, I know I don't need to.

Russia has an economy the size of Texas right? I believe I have very correctly said from the early stages of the Ukraine war our diplomats should be bending Russian diplomats ears with a steady stream of offers to assist in securing and safekeeping Russias nuke arsenal. If that arsenal is neutralized, that's it, the end. The Great Bear Boogie man we can guess will always live in in the minds of the quavering sissy boys, but it's been demonstrated over and over Vlad ain't capable of anything else.

He has great sway over Republicans because they are phony hypocrites and he has the proof.

Personally I doubt his strategic weapons are any more reliable than his tactical forces turned out to be, the Strategic Rocket Forces have always been one of the most corrupt branches of the Soviet/Russian forces, so I would expect missiles that won't fly and warheads that won't go bang, where-ever they land.

Nukes horrify me. I wonder if they weren't too evil to even build once and it has to have been a mistake to let them proliferate.

I wouldn't think it'd matter if Vlads nukes fly or not, 6000 nukes on the loose or just unsupervised seems a bummer.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
So, we should just not worry about them? What does Greta have to say about that?
Most of the tests since the early '60's have been underground. There was a good reason for that decision. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I would prefer a pray for the best (they blow up in Russians launch platforms, and expect the worse type of planning:approach.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
So, we should just not worry about them? What does Greta have to say about that?
Most of the tests since the early '60's have been underground. There was a good reason for that decision. Regards, Bill.

There were 520 "atmospheric" tests, including underwater tests, with a total yield more than 5 times that of the 1352 underground tests. Some of the atmospheric tests involved weapons up to 50x the yield of anything known to be currently deployed.

I'm not saying we should run out and start a general strategic nuclear exchange; I'm just trying to tell you they aren't going to wipe out humanity as is generally believed.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Somehow if something like Covid can screw up food distribution in this country, let’s just say 10% of Jeffive’s warheads actually work. That’s 130.

Say only 3/4 are aimed at the US.

Ballpark 80.

Say we can shoot down 20% (and of course it will be where it will do the least good… DC)

So we have 50 major cities hit.

Cities are rarely primary nuclear targets, particularly under Soviet/Russian doctrine. They desperately need to attrit our land-based missiles and bomber bases because our subs are essentially invulnerable so reducing land-based retaliation is the best shot they have.

From Hiroshima/nagasaki at least 5-10 million dead from blast effects and our electrical grid and communication infrastructure shot from EMP.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were essentially built out of bamboo and paper, fires destroyed at least 4 times as much as the blasts did. Total immediate dead across both cities were about 150,000. Widespread EMP is only a factor in high-altitude detonations, which do little if any damage on the ground.

Depending on time of year, maybe 100 million dead from starvation/lack of medical care/heat in a year. No world mobilization to save us. Likely some internal conflict due to our current divisiveness.

Pure speculation pulled directly out of your ass. I estimate 6 people and 3 cows are likely to die.

So yeah, not the end of the world. Just the end of the world as we know it.

You studied and practiced medicine; for 5 years I studied nuclear and chemical war, and for three I plotted nuclear attacks on every city in Europe, East and West, and calculated where the fallout hazards would most likely be afterwards. You see, Doctor, we didn't have the option of throwing our hands up and crying "Oh, Woe is me", we had to be prepared to fight a war AFTER the nukes were expended.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Jeffive, what's your take on the Poiedon drone sub, which is essentially a dirty bomb aimed at making the US coast uninhabitable?

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
My understanding is its a cobalt bomb, not designed to do massive short term damage, but to make a large area potentially uninhabitable. Which if true is the equivalent of a kick to the balls , or biting someone's ear when you are loosing.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Somehow if something like Covid can screw up food distribution in this country, let’s just say 10% of Jeffive’s warheads actually work. That’s 130.

Say only 3/4 are aimed at the US.

Ballpark 80.

Say we can shoot down 20% (and of course it will be where it will do the least good… DC)

So we have 50 major cities hit.

Cities are rarely primary nuclear targets, particularly under Soviet/Russian doctrine. They desperately need to attrit our land-based missiles and bomber bases because our subs are essentially invulnerable so reducing land-based retaliation is the best shot they have.

From Hiroshima/nagasaki at least 5-10 million dead from blast effects and our electrical grid and communication infrastructure shot from EMP.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were essentially built out of bamboo and paper, fires destroyed at least 4 times as much as the blasts did. Total immediate dead across both cities were about 150,000. Widespread EMP is only a factor in high-altitude detonations, which do little if any damage on the ground.

Depending on time of year, maybe 100 million dead from starvation/lack of medical care/heat in a year. No world mobilization to save us. Likely some internal conflict due to our current divisiveness.

Pure speculation pulled directly out of your ass. I estimate 6 people and 3 cows are likely to die.

So yeah, not the end of the world. Just the end of the world as we know it.

You studied and practiced medicine; for 5 years I studied nuclear and chemical war, and for three I plotted nuclear attacks on every city in Europe, East and West, and calculated where the fallout hazards would most likely be afterwards. You see, Doctor, we didn't have the option of throwing our hands up and crying "Oh, Woe is me", we had to be prepared to fight a war AFTER the nukes were expended.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Somehow if something like Covid can screw up food distribution in this country, let’s just say 10% of Jeffive’s warheads actually work. That’s 130.

Say only 3/4 are aimed at the US.

Ballpark 80.

Say we can shoot down 20% (and of course it will be where it will do the least good… DC)

So we have 50 major cities hit.

Cities are rarely primary nuclear targets, particularly under Soviet/Russian doctrine. They desperately need to attrit our land-based missiles and bomber bases because our subs are essentially invulnerable so reducing land-based retaliation is the best shot they have.

From Hiroshima/nagasaki at least 5-10 million dead from blast effects and our electrical grid and communication infrastructure shot from EMP.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were essentially built out of bamboo and paper, fires destroyed at least 4 times as much as the blasts did. Total immediate dead across both cities were about 150,000. Widespread EMP is only a factor in high-altitude detonations, which do little if any damage on the ground.

Depending on time of year, maybe 100 million dead from starvation/lack of medical care/heat in a year. No world mobilization to save us. Likely some internal conflict due to our current divisiveness.

Pure speculation pulled directly out of your ass. I estimate 6 people and 3 cows are likely to die.

So yeah, not the end of the world. Just the end of the world as we know it.

You studied and practiced medicine; for 5 years I studied nuclear and chemical war, and for three I plotted nuclear attacks on every city in Europe, East and West, and calculated where the fallout hazards would most likely be afterwards. You see, Doctor, we didn't have the option of throwing our hands up and crying "Oh, Woe is me", we had to be prepared to fight a war AFTER the nukes were expended.

I’m not the one who is claiming that there aren’t that many.

I don’t disagree that the US will exist in some form in your situation.

I took some classes on strategic defense in ROTC. We did calculate blast radius, etc. using the declassified available information. Hell, in the ER in where I did residency there was a USAF map of the city with all these interesting red circles… labeled 100 kt, 500 kt, 1 mt. With some footnotes that were redacted.


Yes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not modern construction- but Nagasaki was dropped in a valley and the bombs were orders of magnitude smaller yield. Frankly I doubt that modern frame housing and prefab steel buildings are that much better at blast resistance… see what a tornado does to houses, and that’s 120MPH wind. Fire? Maybe somewhat better, but still will generate a firestorm.

Yes, I think my estimates are closer than yours stated here.

Given the Russians know we are so dependent on electronics, you would have to be kind of simple to presume they would not try and flash our networks with EMP.

The whole counterforce strategy argument is not particularly relevant. We can’t say what Putin or his military minds have programmed their strategy for- especially given that our availability and response times are pretty open and there is little point to nuking empty silos- unless you are admitting that our current POTUS would not order a launch until after we were hit…

Our SAC bombers would likely get up, and they have to have concerns about interception given the issues in Ukraine, although that has always been our least reliable part of the Triad in terms of hitting the target.

I also suspect that there have been some changes in targeting due to the development and deployment of anti missile capable ADA.

I know my military knowledge is neither as in depth as yours nor is it really recent… but the damage estimates are all applied statistics, which is something I deal with daily.

100 million deaths is around 1/3 of the population of the US. Yes, we will still be here… but given how severe that would be, I doubt the country would be very similar to now.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
blah blah -ranting in peckerwood-

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Jeffi, are you quoting the same 40 yr old knowledge you had of missile numbers?
Where every thursday we destroyed thousands of them we had so many stockpiled. The reality being, we are 5 years behind in missiles to just resupply.
I'm sure time stands still at peckerwood junction where you live. But things change over the decades.
" Park you truck right here on the railroad tracks" "I tell ya, the train doesnt come by until 3 pm, or did when I was a kid"

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Jeffi, are you quoting the same 40 yr old knowledge you had of missile numbers?
Where every thursday we destroyed thousands of them we had so many stockpiled. The reality being, we are 5 years behind in missiles to just resupply.
I'm sure time stands still at peckerwood junction where you live. But things change over the decades.
" Park you truck right here on the railroad tracks" "I tell ya, the train doesnt come by until 3 pm, or did when I was a kid"

Welcome to the list with bluefish and jeffeosso.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Somehow if something like Covid can screw up food distribution in this country, let’s just say 10% of Jeffive’s warheads actually work. That’s 130.

Say only 3/4 are aimed at the US.

Ballpark 80.

Say we can shoot down 20% (and of course it will be where it will do the least good… DC)

So we have 50 major cities hit.

Cities are rarely primary nuclear targets, particularly under Soviet/Russian doctrine. They desperately need to attrit our land-based missiles and bomber bases because our subs are essentially invulnerable so reducing land-based retaliation is the best shot they have.

From Hiroshima/nagasaki at least 5-10 million dead from blast effects and our electrical grid and communication infrastructure shot from EMP.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were essentially built out of bamboo and paper, fires destroyed at least 4 times as much as the blasts did. Total immediate dead across both cities were about 150,000. Widespread EMP is only a factor in high-altitude detonations, which do little if any damage on the ground.

Depending on time of year, maybe 100 million dead from starvation/lack of medical care/heat in a year. No world mobilization to save us. Likely some internal conflict due to our current divisiveness.

Pure speculation pulled directly out of your ass. I estimate 6 people and 3 cows are likely to die.

So yeah, not the end of the world. Just the end of the world as we know it.

You studied and practiced medicine; for 5 years I studied nuclear and chemical war, and for three I plotted nuclear attacks on every city in Europe, East and West, and calculated where the fallout hazards would most likely be afterwards. You see, Doctor, we didn't have the option of throwing our hands up and crying "Oh, Woe is me", we had to be prepared to fight a war AFTER the nukes were expended.

I’m not the one who is claiming that there aren’t that many.

I don’t disagree that the US will exist in some form in your situation.

I took some classes on strategic defense in ROTC. We did calculate blast radius, etc. using the declassified available information. Hell, in the ER in where I did residency there was a USAF map of the city with all these interesting red circles… labeled 100 kt, 500 kt, 1 mt. With some footnotes that were redacted.


Yes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not modern construction- but Nagasaki was dropped in a valley and the bombs were orders of magnitude smaller yield. Frankly I doubt that modern frame housing and prefab steel buildings are that much better at blast resistance… see what a tornado does to houses, and that’s 120MPH wind. Fire? Maybe somewhat better, but still will generate a firestorm.

Yes, I think my estimates are closer than yours stated here.

Given the Russians know we are so dependent on electronics, you would have to be kind of simple to presume they would not try and flash our networks with EMP.

The whole counterforce strategy argument is not particularly relevant. We can’t say what Putin or his military minds have programmed their strategy for- especially given that our availability and response times are pretty open and there is little point to nuking empty silos- unless you are admitting that our current POTUS would not order a launch until after we were hit…

Our SAC bombers would likely get up, and they have to have concerns about interception given the issues in Ukraine, although that has always been our least reliable part of the Triad in terms of hitting the target.

I also suspect that there have been some changes in targeting due to the development and deployment of anti missile capable ADA.

I know my military knowledge is neither as in depth as yours nor is it really recent… but the damage estimates are all applied statistics, which is something I deal with daily.

100 million deaths is around 1/3 of the population of the US. Yes, we will still be here… but given how severe that would be, I doubt the country would be very similar to now.

I didn't realize I was addressing an expert who took some ROTC classes, obviously my piddling graduation from the NBC Operations NCO School and 5 years of hands-on experience cannot compare to such expertise.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Somehow if something like Covid can screw up food distribution in this country, let’s just say 10% of Jeffive’s warheads actually work. That’s 130.

Say only 3/4 are aimed at the US.

Ballpark 80.

Say we can shoot down 20% (and of course it will be where it will do the least good… DC)

So we have 50 major cities hit.

Cities are rarely primary nuclear targets, particularly under Soviet/Russian doctrine. They desperately need to attrit our land-based missiles and bomber bases because our subs are essentially invulnerable so reducing land-based retaliation is the best shot they have.

From Hiroshima/nagasaki at least 5-10 million dead from blast effects and our electrical grid and communication infrastructure shot from EMP.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were essentially built out of bamboo and paper, fires destroyed at least 4 times as much as the blasts did. Total immediate dead across both cities were about 150,000. Widespread EMP is only a factor in high-altitude detonations, which do little if any damage on the ground.

Depending on time of year, maybe 100 million dead from starvation/lack of medical care/heat in a year. No world mobilization to save us. Likely some internal conflict due to our current divisiveness.

Pure speculation pulled directly out of your ass. I estimate 6 people and 3 cows are likely to die.

So yeah, not the end of the world. Just the end of the world as we know it.

You studied and practiced medicine; for 5 years I studied nuclear and chemical war, and for three I plotted nuclear attacks on every city in Europe, East and West, and calculated where the fallout hazards would most likely be afterwards. You see, Doctor, we didn't have the option of throwing our hands up and crying "Oh, Woe is me", we had to be prepared to fight a war AFTER the nukes were expended.

I’m not the one who is claiming that there aren’t that many.

I don’t disagree that the US will exist in some form in your situation.

I took some classes on strategic defense in ROTC. We did calculate blast radius, etc. using the declassified available information. Hell, in the ER in where I did residency there was a USAF map of the city with all these interesting red circles… labeled 100 kt, 500 kt, 1 mt. With some footnotes that were redacted.


Yes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not modern construction- but Nagasaki was dropped in a valley and the bombs were orders of magnitude smaller yield. Frankly I doubt that modern frame housing and prefab steel buildings are that much better at blast resistance… see what a tornado does to houses, and that’s 120MPH wind. Fire? Maybe somewhat better, but still will generate a firestorm.

Yes, I think my estimates are closer than yours stated here.

Given the Russians know we are so dependent on electronics, you would have to be kind of simple to presume they would not try and flash our networks with EMP.

The whole counterforce strategy argument is not particularly relevant. We can’t say what Putin or his military minds have programmed their strategy for- especially given that our availability and response times are pretty open and there is little point to nuking empty silos- unless you are admitting that our current POTUS would not order a launch until after we were hit…

Our SAC bombers would likely get up, and they have to have concerns about interception given the issues in Ukraine, although that has always been our least reliable part of the Triad in terms of hitting the target.

I also suspect that there have been some changes in targeting due to the development and deployment of anti missile capable ADA.

I know my military knowledge is neither as in depth as yours nor is it really recent… but the damage estimates are all applied statistics, which is something I deal with daily.

100 million deaths is around 1/3 of the population of the US. Yes, we will still be here… but given how severe that would be, I doubt the country would be very similar to now.

I didn't realize I was addressing an expert who took some ROTC classes, obviously my piddling graduation from the NBC Operations NCO School and 5 years of hands-on experience cannot compare to such expertise.

The point being that?

Applied statistics is pretty straightforward.

Your comment states that MAD is all wet.

As to your comment about 5 years and NCO school…. A buddy of mine was a colonel at SAC.

“Where did you find this guy?”

I was giving your expertise the benefit of the doubt… but what you are saying is so different than every expert I’ve ever heard of, and my admittedly minuscule exposure. But the stuff I worked off of was from the DOD. Old data, but still stuff that had declassification stamps on it.

Physics is physics.

I’m on our disaster committee here. We see lots of data. They don’t consider the only 10% as realistic, and the damage is mostly secondary to the loss of civil control and food/energy delivery.

Fatal dosage is fatal dosage (albeit we seem to be finding that over time vs abrupt is different.)

Burns take quite a bit of care.

Distribution networks are based in major cities and ports. That’s why they are targeted.

If you were claiming that the level of fallout might not be that bad, or that the yields of combloc weapons were overstated, that’s one thing, but every vehicle made in the last 30+ years has emissions controls with computerized control of combustion… it isn’t taking too much EMP to fry those chips, and then they don’t work until you get new chips from where?

Yes, the military’s vehicles were hardened at one point. Yes they have plans.

But the military is what, 1 million total, of which about half are deployed overseas? Most of the major bases will likely be hit (and they do tend to be near major cities and ports)…

I get that you are saying that nuclear winter is overstated. I get that the radiation fallout is more a long term health risk than a killer. I get that blast damage is localized.

Look at what a mess Covid made of supply chains… a nuclear exchange, even limited, would be exponentially worse.

Attack the other guy’s lack of credentials instead of pointing out the factual errors…